The Greek for “Word” is, of course, “logos”. As this phrase occurs in the Gospel records. it doesn’t mean the whole Bible. It means clearly enough and without any dispute the Gospel message (eg Mar 2:2; 4:33; 16:20; Luk 3:2; Joh 12:48; 14:24; Acts 4:4; 11:19). The Gospel was preached to Abraham in that it comprises the promises to Him and their fulfillment in Jesus (Gal 3:8). That word of promise was “made flesh” in Jesus; “the word of the oath” of the new covenant, of the promises made to Abraham, “maketh the son” (Heb 7:28). This is just another way of saying that the word of the promises, of the Gospel, was made flesh in Jesus. Note how in Rom 9:6,9 “the word” is called “the word of promise” — those made to Abraham. John’s Gospel tends to repeat the ideas of the other gospel records but in more spiritual terms. Matthew and Luke begin their accounts of the message by giving the genealogies of Jesus, explaining that His birth was the fulfillment, the making flesh, of the promises to Abraham and David. And Mark defines his “beginning of the gospel” as the fact that Jesus was the fulfillment of the OT prophets. John is really doing the same, in essence. But he is using more spiritual language. “In the beginning” there was the word — the word of promise, the word of prophecy, all through the OT. And that word was “made flesh” in Jesus, and on account of that word, all things in the new creation had and would come into being. Luke’s prologue states that he was an “eyewitness and minister of the word from the beginning”; he refers to the word of the Gospel that later became flesh in Jesus. John’s prologue is so similar: “That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, that which we beheld — the word of life” (1Jo 1:1 RV). Joh 1:14 matched this with: “The word was made flesh, and we beheld his glory”.

“Was made flesh”

“The word” is often put for the preaching of the word (Acts 6:2,4,7; Tit 2:5; Rev 1:9; 6:9; 20:4). The man Christ Jesus was the word of the Gospel made flesh. He was and is the epitome of what He and others preached. This is why another title for Jesus was “the Kingdom” — he thus described himself when He said that he, the Kingdom, was amongst them in 1st century Israel (Luk 17:21). “The word of the Kingdom” is paralleled with “the word” (Mat 13:19; cp Mat 13:20-23). The things of the Kingdom and the things of Jesus are inextricably linked. Likewise John calls Jesus “the eternal life” (1Jo 1:2). The life that he lived was the quality of life which we will eternally live in the Kingdom. The personality of Jesus was the living quintessence of all that he preached — as it should be with the living witness which our lives make. To preach “Christ” was and is therefore to preach “the things concerning the Kingdom of God”, because that Kingdom will be all about the manifestation of the man Christ Jesus (Acts 8:5,12). So Jesus was “the word” in the sense that He epitomized the Gospel. This is why Jam 1:18 says that we are born again by the word of the Gospel, and 1Pe 1:23 says that the word who begets is the Lord Jesus.

“The word was God”

“The word”, the “word of the Kingdom”, “the Gospel”, “the word of God” are all parallel expressions throughout the Gospels. The records of the parable of the sower speak of both “the word of God” (Luk 8:11-15) and “the word of the Kingdom” (Mat 13:19). The word / Gospel of God refers to the message which is about God, just as the “word of the Kingdom” means the word which is about the Kingdom, rather than suggesting that the word is one and the same as the Kingdom. “The gospel of God” means the Gospel which is about God, not the Gospel which is God Himself in person (Rom 1:1; 15:16; 2Co 11:7; 1Th 2:2,8,9; 1Pe 4:17). So, the word of God, the Gospel of God, was made flesh in Jesus. “The word of Jesus” and “the word of God” are interchangeable (Acts 19:10,20; 1Th 1:8; 2:13); as is “the word of the Gospel” and “the word of Jesus” (Acts 15:7,35). The word was not directly equivalent to Jesus; rather, he manifested the word, he showed us by his life and words and personality what the Kingdom was like, what God is like; for the word which he “became” was about God, and about the Kingdom. He was the entire Gospel, of God and of His Kingdom, made flesh. And our witness should be modeled on his pattern — we should be the living embodiment of the doctrines we preach.

“He came unto his own”

The context here speaks of both the word which was “in the beginning”, and of Jesus personally, whom John had witnessed to. Acts 10:36-38 RV puts this in simpler terms: “He sent the word unto the children of Israel, preaching the gospel of peace by [in] Jesus Christ — that word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, beginning from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; even Jesus of Nazareth”. The sequence and similarity of thought between this and Joh 1:1-8 is so great that one can only assume that John is deliberately alluding to Luke’s record in Acts, and stating the same truths in spiritual terms: In the beginning was the word of the Gospel which was with God. And then John came witnessing to Jesus, and then the word as it was in Jesus came to the Jews. Paul pleaded with his fellow Jews: “Brethren, children of the stock of Abraham to us is the word of this salvation sent forth” (Acts 13:26 RV). Yet he also wrote that in the fullness of time, God “sent forth His Son, made of a woman” (Gal 4:4). The Son of God was “the word of this salvation” / Jesus.

“All things were made by him”

By the time John was writing his Gospel [somewhat later than the others], the idea of believers being a new creation in Christ would have been developed in the early ecclesia. The Greek translated “made by” occurs often in John’s Gospel. It clearly describes how the Gospel of the Lord Jesus made new men and women; lives were transformed into something new. The phrase is used in the immediate context of John 1: “to become [be made] the sons of God” (Joh 1:12), in that grace and truth came [were made] by Jesus (Joh 1:17). “All things” therefore refers to the “all things” of the new creation. Note how Jesus came unto “his own things” (Joh 1:11 RV mg), ie to the Jewish people. “All things” therefore comfortably refers to the “all things” of the new creation — which is just how Paul uses the phrase (Eph 1:10,22; 4:10; Col 1:16-20). Quite simply all of us, in “all things” of our spiritual experience, owe them all to Gods word of promise and its fulfillment in Christ. This is how totally central are the promises to Abraham!

Consider other occurrences of “made by” in John’s Gospel: (a) Joh 4:14: The water of the life of Jesus shall be [made] in the believer “a well of water springing up into everlasting life”; (b) Joh 5:9,14: the lame man “was made” whole; (c) Joh 10:16: the believers shall be made (RV shall become) one flock; (d) Joh 12:36: may be [made], RV become, “the children of light”; (e) Joh 15:8: So shall ye be [made] my disciples; (f) Joh 16:20 Your sorrow shall be turned [made] into joy.

In this sense Jesus can be described as the creator of a “new creation” (2Co 5:17). But in practice, it is the word of the Gospel, the message of Jesus, which brings this about in the lives of those who hear and respond to it. We are born again by the word, the “seed” of the living God (1Pe 1:23 RV mg). In this arresting, shocking analogy, the “word” of the Gospel, the word which was made flesh in the person of Jesus, is likened to the seed or sperm of God. We were begotten again by “the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creations” (Jam 1:18). In God’s word, in all that is revealed in it of the person of our Lord Jesus, we come face to face with the imperative: as we know of him, then we should be like him. In this feature of God’s word, as it is in the Bible record and therefore and thereby as it is in and of His Son, we have the ultimate creative power, the dynamism so desperately needed by humanity, to transform lives. (DH)

Paraphrase of John 1

Initially there was a pattern for everything. The pattern was God’s; God was the pattern. The pattern was always God. Everything came from that pattern. There isn’t anything else. The pattern is both the source of life and the meaning of life. It is a way of being alive in opposition to death, and death cannot overcome it.

God sent a man named John to tell people about the possibilities of this way of being alive in opposition to death so everybody would trust the source of life. John wasn’t the source of life; he taught how to recognize the pattern. The true pattern, the source and meaning of everybody’s life, was coming to people.

To some people, however, life, and what life is all about, is unrecognizable. Some who could be expected to see the possibilities of this way of being alive select death instead. Others embrace life. They trust what life offers.

Life offers something more intense than the strongest family ties: obtaining a new parent, God, the source, the meaning of life itself. The initial pattern for everything that is became a human being and lived among us. We experienced how awesome that is: as awesome as a newborn baby is to its daddy, the gift of life and all its possibilities.

“It is not good that a man should be alone” (Gen 2:18).

How true these words are. With the exception of the hermit or proverbial “loner”, nearly all human beings crave the comfort of companionship. In fact, it has been common throughout history to punish people by depriving them of companionship and human interaction. They call this solitary confinement. This punishment is so devastating and severe that it is used on only the most uncontrollable and incorrigible inmates as a matter of last resort.

Everyone has at some time in his life experienced the emotion we call loneliness. For a few, the experience is short-lived and insignificant, while for others the experience is a tremendous burden and seems to last forever. There is a difference between being alone and loneliness. Being alone simply means not having anyone else around. This can be a very positive experience. A young mother may cherish a few hours alone to recharge her batteries. Jesus himself on several occasions left the crowds to go into the mountains to be alone. In contrast, loneliness is a feeling. You can be in a room full of people and still feel lonely.

Since loneliness is a feeling, it is a mistake to project our definition and concept of loneliness upon other people. Loneliness is really our need for human interaction minus the interaction we actually get. It is as individual as the individual. For some it is the depth of relationships that is missing from their lives, while for others it is the breadth of relationships.

It is intuitive for us to think of a certain type of person as lonely: a person who has been searching for — but never found — a mate, a person who after years of raising children finds herself in an empty house, a person who has physical limitations which do not allow him to get out much. Yet, many of these people might be quite content in their condition. On the other hand, some whom one might assume to be anything but lonely may be the loneliest people of all: the young mother who craves adult conversation, the leader on whom everyone depends, but who has no one to which to turn, the ‘life of the party’ person who never develops deep friendships, or the spouse in a loveless marriage.

The ecclesia should be a haven for the lonely. The ecclesia is supposed to be one big family. As anyone knows who ever grew up in a big family, being alone is difficult in a house full of people. Too often we fall short of this ideal. People get busy with their lives and fail to realize that an ecclesial member is lonely. People tend to hide things such as loneliness fairly well — so that to the casual observer everything seems fine. You don’t have to pry into people’s personal lives to see if they are lonely. If you suspect someone is lonely and you wish to help, even the smallest efforts can make a huge difference. Invite the older widow to come with you to your child’s soccer game. Ask the young mother if she would like to grab some lunch and chat in a place where the kids can play. See the young man who is far from home if he has plans for the coming holiday, and would like to spend it with your family. Tell your friend in the difficult marriage that you are there for them if they ever want to talk.

If you are one of those lonely people, perhaps the best way to relieve your loneliness is to find a way to help people in an interactive way. Go and serve once a week in a soup kitchen, nursing home or orphanage. Get involved with the youth at your ecclesia by taking them on outings or helping with your youth group. Think specifically what it is that you feel you are missing from your life and what behaviors contribute to that state — and put a plan in place to change it.

No, it is not good that man should be alone. Maybe TOGETHER we can overcome it.

---

“And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” Following this observation, God created woman and thus the institution of marriage. From this simple chain of events, we could easily draw the conclusion that marriage is the Divine answer to loneliness and since loneliness is “not good” in the eyes of God, everyone should marry. It is the highest ideal for which we should all strive.

If this is true as a blanket statement, it seems odd that the Apostle Paul would suggest to us that, “I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn” (1Co 7:7-9). The Apostle has suggested to us that remaining chaste and single is a higher calling than being married. Doesn’t this fly in the face of what we have read in Genesis?

We can’t make that judgment without examining Paul’s reasoning.

So what are Paul’s reasons for remaining single?

• It is a matter of TIME. He tells us in v 29 that the time is short. One can sense in Paul that things concerning the Son of God and the Gospel message are incredibly urgent as we are racing forward toward the culmination of human history — the Kingdom of God on earth.

• It is a matter of PRIORITY. Things of this life, including taking a wife or husband, are wasting precious time and energy that could be devoted to “the Lord’s affairs”. Paul declares, “What I want is for you to be free of concern. An unmarried man concerns himself with the Lord’s affairs, with how to please the Lord; but the married man concerns himself with the world’s affairs, with how to please his wife; and he finds himself split. Likewise the woman who is no longer married or the girl who has never been married concerns herself with the Lord’s affairs, with how to be holy both physically and spiritually; but the married woman concerns herself with the world’s affairs, with how to please her husband. I am telling you this for your own benefit, not to put restrictions on you — I am simply concerned that you live in a proper manner and serve the Lord with undivided devotion” (vv 32-35, Complete Jewish Bible).

• It is a matter of WILL. Some people are stronger than others and more ready to endure suffering for the sake of Christ. There is no sin in “doing well” (marrying) and doing better (not marrying). Paul makes the distinction very clearly when he states, “Now if a man thinks he is behaving dishonorably by treating his fiancee this way, and if there is strong sexual desire, so that marriage is what ought to happen; then let him do what he wants — he is not sinning: let them get married. But if a man has firmly made up his mind, being under no compulsion but having complete control over his will, if he has decided within himself to keep his fiancee a virgin, he will be doing well. So the man who marries his fiancee will do well, and the man who doesn’t marry will do better” (vv 36-38, Complete Jewish Bible).

• Finally, it is a matter of FEELING THE PRESENCE OF THE LORD. Paul does not deal with it in the 1Co 7 passage, but he does deal with it elsewhere. We are the bride of Christ. We are to be to Christ as the wife is to the husband. If we feel the real and tangible nature of this relationship, we are never truly alone. Jesus has promised us that “I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee” (Heb 13:5). The good shepherd is always with us. “Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me” (Psa 23:4). Yes, it is true that it is not good for man to be alone. Yet, once we come into the saving name of Jesus Christ, how can we ever again be truly alone? (KT)

* OUR humble prayer, in Jesus’ name, In faith, on bended knee;

* FATHER of mercies, God of truth And love, we bring to thee.

* WHICH of thy creatures, Lord, do not Thy gracious goodness share?

* ART Thou not mindful of all thy works, Thy presence everywhere?

* IN HEAVEN above, on earth beneath, Thy Majesty shines forth;

* HALLOWED BE thy holy name, East, West, South and North.

* THY NAME is great, thy word stands fast Eternal as thy days

* THY rule extend o’er all the earth, Send Jesus back again,

* KINGDOM and empire shall submit, And he the right maintain.

* COME quickly then, thy kingdom come, Eden again restore;

* THY word send forth from Zion’s height, Let sinners be no more

* WILL not the waiting sons of men Obey thy high command?

* BE loyal to the King of Kings, Supreme in all the land?

* DONE as by angel hosts above Thy glorious will shall be

* ON all the earth Thy glory spread As waters o’er the sea.

* EARTH cursed and marred through sin and death, Shall yet again be blest.

* AS truly as I live, thou say’st, There yet remains a rest.

* IT IS IN Thine own power, O Lord, The mighty work to do;

* HEAVEN condescends to make it known, And ratifies it too.

* GIVE US to understand thy word, And daily may we feed;

* THIS would we ask, all-gracious Lord, Supply our every need.

* DAY after day in prayer we seek The help thy grace imparts.

* OUR way commit to thee, O Lord, Who only knows our hearts;

* DAILY do thou that prayer regard, Our every way control.

* BREAD give, which lasts for ever more, Quick’ning the inmost soul.

* AND if thou seest aught amiss, In thought, in deed, or word.

* FORGIVE US for thy mercy’s sake, Through Jesus Christ our Lord.

* OUR DEBTS thou never canst forgive, If we should see revenge;

* AS WE FORGIVE this may we learn, Jehovah will avenge.

* OUR DEBTORS would we pray for, Lord, With kindness treat our foes;

* AND seek to know and learn of him, Who ne’er resented woes.

* LEAD US in pastures fresh and green, That we may grow thereby;

* NOT INTO that which leads astray, And causes men to die.

* TEMPTATION may we always shun, And if it comes, endure;

* BUT may we always this hold fast, Deliverance is sure.

* DELIVER US FROM wicked men, Who cast Thy word behind,

* EVIL stands thick through all the land To fascinate the mind.

* FOR all we ask in Jesus’ name, According to Thy will;

* THINE is it, Lord, to grant request, And thine own word fulfill.

* IS not thy truth in every age A shield and buckler, too?

* THE promises which thou hast given Are faithful, firm, and true.

* KINGDOM, crown and might shall fall, While truth shall still remain;

* THE poor shall yet be raised to power, And in they kingdom reign.

* POWER shall be given to those once weak, Who shall awake and sing,

* AND live through him who coped with death, And drew its fatal sting.

* THE saints of every age and clime, Redeemed by his own blood,

* GLORY and might ascribe to him Who brings us unto God.

* FOR EVER shall the song be sung, Of Moses and the Lamb;

* AMEN. And angels and men shall bow, And shout aloud, Amen!!

(From “The Christadelphian”, Dec 1882).

“The three parables of Luke 15 are treated as one, for introducing them Luke wrote: ‘He spake this parable (not parables) unto them’ (Luk 15:3). Each parable adds to the one that went before it, so that they follow one upon another without specific introduction (Luk 15:8,11). They illustrate three different aspects of one subject: The work of redemption. Consider the different causes of the loss in the three parables. The sheep was lost through its own action; it strayed from the shepherd through curiosity or desire for better pasture. The coin was lost, not through its own fault, but that of the woman who possessed it. The son was lost through deliberately, willfully, and consciously leaving the house of his generous father, and squandering the inheritance granted him. The first represented a one per cent loss of the flock; the second, a ten per cent loss of the woman’s hoard; the third, a fifty per cent loss of the family. These figures are significant. They suggest that whilst comparatively few may stray through curiosity or desire for better pasture, the greater number are lost by the carelessness of others, whilst even more leave through wilful, fleshly desire. Now consider the three mediums of reconciliation in each parable. The shepherd represents the Lord Jesus; the woman, the ecclesia; and the father, Yahweh. The first parable centers attention on the loss, the second on the search, the third on the restoration, so that the dominant verbs throughout are ‘lost, seek, find, and rejoice’. If these principles are kept in mind whilst the parables are studied, many wonderful points of exhortation will be revealed” (SB 10:7:108).

The reason for Christ’s use of the three related parables of Luke 15 is given in Luk 15:2, where the Pharisees are heard to murmur, “This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.” Here was a question of “fellowship”; this itinerant preacher, this rabbi who was soliciting their discipleship, was asking them — the “separated ones” — to follow his example in taking to their bosom “sinners” of every sort! It was absolutely unthinkable!

The third of the three parables is usually known as “The Prodigal Son”. It may also be called “The Lost Sons” (plural) because, in actual fact, at the beginning both of the sons were lost. Like the one hundredth sheep, the younger son was lost outside the fold, away from home. But, like the tenth coin, the elder was “lost” inside the house. He never strayed physically from his father, but his mind and his heart were miles away!

The parable of the lost sons introduces personal factors which cannot be found in the two preceding parables. “A sheep might realize it is lost — but it cannot rise to any sense of folly in having strayed” (PM 233).

And a coin is completely without thought or feeling. But both sons are capable of realizing their relative positions in regard to the father; they are both capable of repentance, and of taking the initiative to bridge the gap. Whether the elder brother ever succeeded in aligning himself with the mind of his father is the lingering, unanswered question at the close of the parable. And it was the question which lingered in the air, from that day forward, for every one of the proud Pharisees who heard the story.

There is a great urgency of love and reconciliation in Christ’s picture of the waiting and watching father, as he daily and even hourly stares down the road, looking for the familiar figure. There is not one shred of formality or legality in his reception of his returning son. Even while he is a great way off, his father sees him, and with compassion, runs and falls upon his neck and kisses him (Luk 15:20).

“He did not stand upon his dignity, or remain coldly aloof demanding proof of repentance. He did not force an apology. He loved him and he wanted him back and he was willing to forget the past and hope for the future. He showered every display of affection and attention upon him, in his intense joy at reconciliation” (GVG, Ber 48:158,159).

Here is the divine example for the ecclesial attitude toward any sinning brother who makes the first, faltering steps toward repentance. The members should never question the sincerity of those who seek to return (for they would not like their own sincerity to be questioned), nor should they make the barriers to fellowship more difficult for such than for new converts. The ecclesia should rejoice in that the withdrawal of fellowship collectively administered has by God’s grace achieved its hoped-for outcome: the reclamation of the one who has strayed.

In this consideration of the parable we shall concentrate upon the attitude of the elder son, so that at all costs we will avoid his failings. When the younger brother had returned and been received by the father, the elder “was angry, and would not go in” (Luk 15:28). He chose to absent himself from his brother’s feast with the father. In the spiritual application of the parable, he not only put his repentant brother “out of fellowship” but also all those who were “in fellowship” with his brother! In a “clean sweep” he rejected all who sat down to eat with him. But in drawing such a rigid line between himself and his brother, he accomplished one other thing: he unwittingly placed himself outside the father’s house!

The elder brother rudely voiced his own righteousness in rather extravagant terms: “Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment” (Luk 15:29). Here is the extreme Pharisaical attitude that often goes arm-in-arm with the “touch not, handle not” school of “fellowship”: “I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as other men, especially this miserable sinner.”

“How ungracious the older brother seems in contrast with his father’s love! But it did not seem so to him. He felt quite justified in his self-righteous indignation. He had no qualms at distressing his father, or marring the joy of reconciliation. He could only see one point of view and that was that he had worked hard and faithfully and here was this returned wastrel being shown favors that he had never received” (GVG 159).

How could the elder son claim perfect obedience? It was impossible. And even as he stood there in his bitterness and jealousy, he was at that very moment disobeying the father’s will! May it never be our folly to stand upon our “accomplishments” and blindly overlook, at our very fingertips, the simple work we have left undone: that is, reconciliation with our brethren.

“And yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends.” The elder son, just like the younger, had associates outside the family circle, characters that he had not brought to his father’s table. This in itself suggests something less than a perfect obedience. And how true it is, that when we measure ourselves against our brethren, and say secretly, “I am better than he”, we are really only saying, “I was smart enough never to sin openly”! But we have all sinned — of this there can be no doubt. It is fatal to look upon one’s own sins as not being as “serious” as another’s.

The elder contemptuously disclaimed kinship with the younger in Luk 15:30: ‘He may be your son, but he is not my brother’, he seems to be saying. But the father patiently and gently responds, “For this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found” (Luk 15:32). “He is your brother and my son, whether you disown him or not!” It is certainly not without significance that the fatted calf (the special sacrifice of communion typifying Christ) was slain on behalf of the repentant sinner, not the proud “Pharisee”! How tragic it is that by his own hateful words the elder son admits that the “fatted calf” is not for him! He could have shared in it with his brother if only he had swallowed his pride and come into the house!

So we see in the elder brother some rather unlovely characteristics. May they never, even subconsciously, be ours! Here is unbridled jealousy: bitterness at the inclusion of his brother in his own previously exclusive benefits. Here is also greed, the latent fear: ‘He has already thrown away (on harlots, a gratuitous assumption — or was it true?) one-half (or one-third?) of your property, and now he wants mine!’

All that the elder brother had he had received from the father. Should he not go out of his way now to welcome his brother (thus pleasing the father)? There is joy in heaven, with the Father and His angels, when one sinner repents (Luk 15:7,10). What might the Father think of us, if we are angry or jealous or proudly aloof upon an occasion that gives Him joy?

The theme of the Pharisaic attitude toward repentance and reconciliation, which begins with Christ’s three parables in Luk 15, continues through the next two chapters, providing other insights into the mind and character of the brother who was “lost” while still “at home”:

• Luk 16:13: “No servant can serve two masters.” In his scarcely-hid concern for wealth and privilege, the elder son was demonstrating that he was not a single-minded servant of the Father. He was really a clandestine servant of “mammon”, a “hireling” who sought his own reward (Joh 10:12,13), not a son who rejoiced above all else in the work of the Father.

• Luk 16:15: “And he said unto the Pharisees: ‘Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.’ ”

• Luk 17:3-5: “Take heed to yourselves” — Examine yourselves as severely and more so than you examine others. If your brother trespasses, then rebuke him; but always stand ready to forgive him — not just once or twice, but seven times in one day if need be! And the apostles, recognizing that such an attitude requires faith, pray Jesus to increase their faith. It is for us from time to time to exercise this kind of faith — faith that, despite perplexing problems, all things will work together for the good of Christ’s ecclesias; faith that our brethren will by God’s mercy stand firm in the faith despite ever-present failings; faith that God will realize His plan without our constant brooding and worrying, or our presumptuous intervention in matters that do not directly affect us. Can we not develop such faith that God will do His part? This is the faith that pleases God, and without which He cannot be pleased!

• Luk 17:10: “When ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, ‘We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do.’ ” Here is the reason for the command that we should receive repentant sinners, and for the command that we should seek reconciliation with our brethren despite their imperfections: we are ALL unprofitable servants; the most we can possibly do is but our duty. Our Father has for each of us an inheritance infinitely greater than we could ever earn. Let us not be found in the position of appearing to deny that inheritance to others who have, in the last analysis, applied for it upon the same basis as we: not by works — lest any man should boast — but by the unlimited mercy of a loving Father.

If I live in a house of spotless beauty with everything in its place, but have not love, I am a housekeeper, not a homemaker.

If I have time for waxing, polishing, and decorative achievements, but have not love, my children learn cleanliness — not godliness.

Love leaves the dust in search of a child’s laugh. Love smiles at the tiny fingerprints on a newly cleaned window. Love wipes away the tears before it wipes away the spilled milk. Love picks up the child before it picks up the toys. Love is present through the trial. Love reprimands, reproves, and is responsive.

Love crawls with the baby, walks with the toddler, and runs with the child, then stands aside to let the youth walk into adulthood.

Love is the key that opens salvation’s message to a child’s heart.

Before I became a mother, I took glory in my house of perfection. Now I glory in God’s perfection of my child. As a mother, there is much I must teach my child, but the greatest of all is love.

(Anonymous)

“Let the reader understand.”

This parenthetical remark by Matthew urges the reader of the Mount Olivet prophecy to pay special attention to Jesus’ reference to Daniel’s prophecy. The context is:

“So when you see the desolating sacrilege spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains; let him who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house; and let him who is in the field not turn back to take his mantle” (Mat 24:15-18).

Jesus is clearly emphasizing the need to get out fast, not even stopping to get one’s coat, much less some prized possession. When forewarned disciples perceived that destruction was about to burst upon the province of Judea and everyone in it, they were to flee. Luke’s version of Jesus’ words are:

“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it; for these are days of vengeance, to fulfil all that is written” (Luke 21:20-22).

This added detail points out the city which is doomed to destruction — Jerusalem! God was taking vengeance upon it, as prophesied earlier in Scripture. Where had this been written? In Daniel, certainly, since Jesus explicitly alluded to him. The probable reference is Daniel 11:31, which says:

“Forces from him [the king of the north] shall appear and profane the temple and fortress, and shall take away the continual burnt offering. And they shall set up the abomination that makes desolate.”

This verse is part of a lengthy passage (Dan 10:1 — 12:13), of which Daniel was explicitly told by the interpreting angel, “[I] came to make you understand what is to befall your people in the latter days. For the vision is for days yet to come” (Dan 10:14).

So Daniel had to be given angelic help to understand events yet future to him and the people of Israel. The exact fulfillment of “the abomination that makes desolate” is not recorded in Scripture. Some Bible students contend that it was fulfilled in 168 BC when Antiochus Epiphanes erected a pagan altar to Zeus on the sacred altar in the temple of Jerusalem. Jesus evidently saw a fulfillment of it subsequent to his prediction around AD 30, and the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70 certainly fits. Yet surely there is another fulfillment to come “in the latter days”, ie, OUR DAYS. How should we understand it?

The point of focus must be Jerusalem. The outworking must involve the people of Israel who live there. And the circumstances must include things that Jesus went on to say in the Matthew and Luke record of the Olivet prophecy:

“For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. And if those days had not been shortened, no human being would be saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened” (Mat 24:21,22).

“Alas for those who are with child and for those who give suck in those days! For great distress shall be upon the earth and wrath upon this people; they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led captive among all nations; and Jerusalem will be trodden down by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled” (Luke 21:23,24).

Since AD 70, and up until 1967, Jerusalem was “trodden down by the Gentiles”. But now the city is back in the hands of the Jews. This is significant, for it sets the stage for ANOTHER FULFILLMENT of Daniel’s prophecy!

As modern-day readers of the Bible texts quoted so far, we are encouraged to understand what Daniel (and by implication, Jesus) meant. What was the “abomination that makes desolate”? Ezekiel and Jeremiah, both contemporary prophets of Daniel, are a big help here. They make it plain that the abominable practices of the Jewish people made the desolation of their temple, city and land inevitable (see Eze 5:11; 7:20-23; 8:5,6; Jer 7:8-11,30; 27:17; 44:22). To cite but two of these passages:

“…Because you have defiled my sanctuary with all your detestable things and with all your abominations, therefore I will cut you down; my eye will not spare, and I will have no pity” (Eze 5:11).

“The LORD could no longer bear your evil doings and the abominations which you committed; therefore your land has become a desolation and a waste and a curse, without inhabitant” (Jer 44:22).

So for a modern-day fulfillment, we can first expect to see the Israeli people living in such a way as to be abominable before God. Scripture suggests we look at their religious convictions and practices. In Jeremiah’s day, one example of defilement was the hypocritical religion that made mockery of God’s house — it had become a den of robbers (Jer 7:11)! Jesus picked up exactly the same idea when he cast the money-changers out of the temple (Luke 19:46). While there is no temple in Israel today to be defiled, a populace which is reportedly 80% agnostic / atheistic indicates a nation that has turned its back on God. Few try to live according to the principles taught by the prophets. And those Israelis who espouse Judaism are openly hostile to Christianity. It would seem, therefore, that a faithless nation of Israel is positioned for the wrath of God to be poured out upon it one more time.

Note the irony. Because His own people were an abomination to Him, and because they had become no better than the Gentiles whom they hated, God would bring upon them a Gentile abomination to leave their city and land desolate!

But take somber note. Observers of Israel’s predicament and impending destruction must realize that when Israel’s judgment comes, the judgment of the whole world is soon to follow, by the Coming of Christ. “Let the reader understand!”

In 1Co 12 Paul speaks of spiritual gifts — that is, the gifts of the Holy Spirit bestowed on some in the first-century ecclesias. These gifts were given with one goal in mind, and no other: the edification of the saints.

In Corinth, apparently, the possessors of these various gifts were flaunting them before their brethren in a disgusting show of pride. The other members of the ecclesia, not so favored, were showing just as much ignorance of the proper use of the gifts, because they coveted them for their own elevation.

To counteract this jealousy and factionalism Paul emphasizes the essential unity of the ecclesia. The ecclesia consists of many members, but they are all parts of the one body of Christ. The individual members possess many gifts (teaching, healing, tongues), but they are all from the one Spirit, and should be used for the benefit of every member equally.

Rather than rivalry, and antagonism, and presumption, the brethren must show love, and care, and modesty, and forbearance toward one another, All are equally partakers of God’s greatest gift: grace and mercy and peace through Christ. Some brethren may have special talents, which of necessity set them apart from their fellows, but these talents must be exercised for the mutual benefit of all.

“There are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, ‘I have no need of you’, nor again the head to the feet, ‘I have no need of you.’ On the contrary the parts of the body which seem to be weaker are indispensable…” (1Co 12:20-22).

It is a sad but common mistake that we nearly all are guilty of. We Chink first of the prominent among us, or the well-educated, or the socially forward, and we rush to greet them, to talk with them, to keep them company. But the ones perhaps who most need a warm greeting or a kind word are the ones we thoughtlessly bypass.

Imitate Jesus

It is the natural tendency at meetings to gather around the leading brethren, the outgoing personalities, or the visiting speakers — while ignoring those shy, quiet ones “around the edges”. But one of the divine characteristics which Christ showed (to the amazement of the proud Pharisees) was his obvious interest in the lower ranks of society, the poor and ill and discouraged. Can we do any better than to imitate our Master?

Paul enumerates the “gifts” of the Spirit (1Co 12:28-30) and agrees that the higher ones, at least, are desirable (v 31). But great gifts (or even talents and abilities bestowed providentially upon some of us today) are not an end in themselves. They are, or should be, the means to an end.

The end is, as we have said already, the upbuilding of the Body of Christ. The means to that end is the “still more excellent way” (v 31) — the way of love. This is the catalyst without which all of our “gifts” or abilities would be useless. Thus Paul continues:

“If I speak in the tongues of men, and (even) of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1Co 13:1,2).

This is the question: Does a man live for himself or for others?

A man may think of his “service” in the Truth as a series of good works, which take a relatively short time, interspersed with a lot of time to care for his own wants. A few dollars in the collection (to be disbursed in some worthy cause by the properly delegated party, with the least amount of fuss and bother). A practiced “Sunday morning” smile for the struggling widowed sister. A Bible class talk hastily prepared and casually given. Several indifferent daily readings sessions. All this set on the scales over against 40 or 50 or 60 hours of secular work, many hours of “entertainment” or “recreation”, twenty-one meals… Another week in the life of an average “saint”? Is this the proper use of our “talents” in the more excellent way of love?

How best to serve God

God has given us all that we have: the air we breathe, the food we eat, the homes we live in. Is any amount of devotion too much when this is considered? Shouldn’t we, at every waking moment, think how best to serve God?

God is a jealous God. He demands all our love and attention. But because we love God the more, do we love our brethren less? Sometimes it seems that we think so. We stand strong and proud on the principles of obedience to God, and the “purity of the Truth”. And we use these concepts to exalt ourselves above our brethren, while remaining indifferent to their spiritual needs.

Our love for God is different, in this respect, than our love for another person. If we truly love God, we will show our love for Him in practical expressions of love for others. True divine love does not exclude human love; it enhances it.

Verses 4-7 contain a dozen or so characteristics of Scriptural “love”:

“Love is patient”

We have the example of Christ, who patiently taught his disciples and time after time helped them when they stumbled and lost faith. Undoubtedly there were times when he wanted to throw up his hands and abandon the effort altogether, for they were so slow to learn and so bent on maintaining their own natural affections. But he loved them dearly; he loved them despite their inadequacies; he prayed for them; and he persisted until his efforts began to bear fruit. Can we do any less for our brethren?

“Love is kind”

This English word “kind” is one of those pale, sentimental words that just does no justice to the original. We should say, instead, that love is consideration — active, involved concern for the needs of others, even to the detriment of one’s own comfort. I am sure that we all think of ourselves as being “kind”, for we certainly are never (seldom?) “unkind”, are we? Are we?

“If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and filled,’ without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit?” (James 2:15,16).

There are times when a “kind word” is no more than hypocrisy, because it masks a failure to help in any practical way. Have we ever been guilty of such an act, in a benign, “friendly” indifference to the circumstances of others? Then we may have been courteous and civil and pleasant, but we have not been kind, and we have not been loving.

“Love is not jealous”

The divergence of gifts among the Corinthian brethren was a cause of jealousy. Likewise, envy can result today from comparisons between brethren: “Who is the better speaker?” “Why was elected Arranging Brother?” “So-and-so wants to run everything. Who he put him in charge?” The person who can ask such questions does not have at heart the best interests of the whole body.

Jealousy is a terrible disease, and often fatal. It destroys its originator much more quickly than the one at whom it is directed.

“Love is not boastful… not arrogant”

Envy and boasting are quite closely related. They both stem from the same basic problem: love of self rather than love of others. True love does not have to be pushy. It does not need attention. It can afford to wait. Remember what Jesus said of the arrogant Pharisees — who did their works to be seen of men: “They already have their reward.” Let this not be said of us.

“Love is not rude”

There is a right way and a wrong way to do almost anything.

Sometimes a gentle admonition or even a stern rebuke needs to be administered. It is possible to be in the right — even to say the right thing — but to say it in absolutely the wrong way. A criticism may be correct in every particular, but if it is delivered with a superior or proud or overbearing manner — or if it is delivered in front of an audience — it will not achieve a good result. As always, the principle is consideration for others: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. In short… love.

“Love does not insist on its own way”

Have you ever participated in a three-legged race? You may be the fastest runner at the picnic, but you’ll wind up sprawled on the grass unless you can adapt yourself to the style of your partner. This principle also holds true in the ecclesia. We are all members of the one body, and we must learn to function as a unit. We are “yoked together” with our brethren in many endeavors; we cannot always choose the way that pleases us most.

Your way of doing things may always be the best, but I can guarantee you that it won’t always be the one chosen by the majority. Then what do you do? Go along or “drop out”? There have been cases of members who have left meetings because of absolutely trivial disagreements, in which they failed to get their own way and just could not bend enough to go along with the others. And they, and sometimes their families, have paid for that stubbornness with twenty or thirty years of self-imposed isolation. There is an extremely illuminating passage, the force of which fairly exploded upon me one day. I had read it dozens of times, but never to much purpose until one day it hit me! Just six words, but a world of exhortation and self-examination:

“For even Christ pleased not himself” (Rom 15:3).

So who are we to think that things should always go our way? Who are we to please ourselves in everything?

“Love is not irritable or resentful”

A person possessing the true love of God has a peace of mind that no other has. In the midst of strife and controversy, he maintains a calm and reasoning mind, and a disposition to peacemaking. He has that same inner serenity that sustained Christ through his great trials.

A person in such a frame of mind cannot be offended by others. He is not provoked to backbiting or vengeance. He relies upon the grace of God, he knows that there is a final judgment that will right all wrongs, and he is not concerned about what man may do to him in the meanwhile. If God is for him, who can be against him?

“Love does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right”

If ever a thought might be coupled with “Let a man examine himself”, surely this is it! Don’t we all do this? Don’t we all listen to gossip and rumors and evil insinuations? Don’t we all — sometimes — derive pleasure from the shortcomings of others, especially those who have previously appeared to be models of rectitude?

We judge ourselves by the standards of others, and when we do this we are glad to see them fall. We tend to think we are lifted up in proportion as our brother is cast down. But when we live by this standard we are completely corrupting Paul’s teachings of the unity of Christ’s body and the dependence of one member upon another. These lofty ideas lose their meaning when cooperation is replaced by competition.

“Love bears all things”

We need go no further than Christ’s example. Christ bore our sins in his body on the tree, and more than that he bore our sorrows that he might be a perfect mediator.

The mind lingers on a picture, perhaps well-known to many. One boy with a younger boy on his back. “He ain’t heavy. He’s my brother!” Strain is obviously there, but he bears his burden gladly. All things are relative, aren’t they? Yes, in more ways than one! We are willing to do for our families what seems intolerable if done for others. Do we sit in the meeting on Sunday morning, and feel that those with whom we break bread are really our family? We write salutations like “Dear Sir” to faceless clerks in faraway cities. For all we know, we could be addressing a computer as “dear”! Are our expressions of “Brother Smith” and “Sister Jones” the same sort of formal, stylized address, or do they express a reality? If a reality, then let us live that family relationship with our brethren. Let us rejoice with them that rejoice, and weep with them that weep. Let us “bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ” (Gal 6:2).

“Love hopes all things… endures all things”

The Christian’s life of love is a joyful existence. In the midst of sorrows and pains, he rejoices in the great gifts of his Creator.

His eye is firmly set upon the hope that rises as a mountain before him. There may be a valley to traverse before he reaches that distant peak. But he never takes his eye off that glorious future; and all life’s little annoyances and Inconveniences are seen for what they are — stepping-stones in route to the kingdom. Paul says in another place: “I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound; everywhere and in all things I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me” (Phi 4:12,13).

***

All that God has given us… riches, talents, intelligence, health… diminish with the passing of time. Man grows old and dies. Only love remains, as a bridge between this life and the life to come, a bridge over the chasm of eternal nothingness. Every other gift or talent will fail, just as the Holy Spirit gifts finally ceased. The only thing that endures is the character of a man, engraved in the infinite mind of God.

“Greater love hath no man than this — that a man lay down his life for his friends.”

The bridge over that chasm is constructed from the two timbers of a cross. On one is written, “Love God”. And on the other, “Love your neighbor as yourself.” By those two principles he lived and died, and he asks us to do the same — to fill up in ourselves, as best we can, the measure of the perfect man. We have been children, petulant and selfish and impatient. Let us now be men, and put away childish things. We have seen in our mirrors blurred images of the perfect man who is striving to be “born” in us, but one day we will see the man himself face to face — and we will know at once by his look whether or not we have made his love our example. For, lest we ever forget, that is the test by which we shall stand or fall:

“So faith, hope, love abide, these three; but…”

“THE GREATEST OF THESE IS LOVE.”

“Any attempt to systematically wipe out the bad guys leaves the group out of balance and desperately in need of a new villain. This may sound silly, but it does happen. Take for instance a small group of committed Christians. They desire to have a pure fellowship — to root out any evil within their midst. The only blight on their horizon is that one member feels comfortable with [pick your favorite ‘error’ here]…

“After failing to dissuade him, the group expels him from their midst as one who is too loose. In essence they’ve pulled in the lines of moral behavior, but now no one is certain how far. Believe it or not, a new deviant will soon emerge from the hitherto ‘good’ people. His or her OK behavior is now on the fringe and is the subject of condemnation…

“This splintering is typical of groups that want to purify their number. The group gets smaller and tighter but is doomed to always being dissatisfied as long as they insist on allowing no dissent…

“Try to heed the sage advice of Gamaliel. When the Sanhedrin was confronted by the disruptive behavior of the disciples he counseled, ‘My advice to you now is to let these men alone; leave them to themselves. For if this teaching or movement is merely human it will collapse of its own accord. But if it should be from God you cannot defeat them, and you might actually find yourself to be fighting against God!’ Benign neglect was what he suggested. But since the Jewish leaders thought they had a corner on all wisdom, they couldn’t tolerate deviance. And they ended up doing the very thing that Gamaliel warned against — opposing God…

“The alternative to deviance is not attractive either. Who wants to head up a mindless conformity? Sameness has a chilling effect on progress… As hard as this is, we have the comfort of knowing that our Lord lived — and died — with this approach to deviance. He was unable to see a crowd; every person was special. He knew them each by name. If he could put up with a political fanatic (Simon the Zealot), a pair of emotional hotheads nicknamed the Sons of Thunder (James and John), a man who openly questioned his resurrection (Thomas), a corrupt tax collector (Matthew) and a money grabber who betrayed him (Judas), how can we do less? In the long run, it turned out to be a pretty good group” (Em Griffin, “Getting Together”).

Luke’s genealogy is given after the record of the baptism of Jesus, and not as part of the record of his birth, because it reveals the reason for his baptism: his descent, shared with all men, from Adam. Jesus’ baptism was the initial step of obedience by which he would deliver himself and others from the condemnation of Adam. It was necessary that the Savior be himself subject to the same weaknesses and infirmity of the flesh as those whom he sought to save (Heb 2:14,15; 4:15; 5:7,8).

Jesus is shown to be the son of Adam, and the last “Adam” because he was the beginning of a new creation. The first Adam brought only death, but in the last Adam all who believe will have life (1Co 15:22,23).

As with Matthew’s list, the numbers are again important. Counting God (Luk 3:38) and Jesus (Luk 3:23), Luke’s genealogy contains 77 names, and 77 is the number of times we must forgive those who sin against us (Mat 18:22; ct Gen 4:24). All those who have sinned against God and His Son may have forgiveness of sins through Christ. Beginning the genealogy with Adam, there are actually 75 generations. Seventy-five is the number of Jacob’s family that went down into Egypt, and died there (Act 7:14,15); they sig all men, who are “dead in their sins” until Christ their passover is sacrificed that they might be set free.

Women are nearly always excluded from genealogies. [To substantiate: Case of Jair, father of Judah (1Ch 2:22). But his grandfather had married the daughter of Machir, tribe of Manasseh (1Ch 2:21; 7:14). And Jair is called the SON of Manasseh (Num 32:41).]